Breaking out PIO (part 2): Live Play with Solver Analysis
Posted by Salternator
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 12 Comments...
Thanks for the great vid. Really enjoy this form of format. I have a general question respective solvers: Solver solutions quite often seem to not fulfill the MDF (minimum defense freq.) in certain spots. This tells me that the concept of MDF is not GTO? Would you therefore rather prefer to use the MDF or the solver soultion at stakes like NL100/NL200? And if we use the solver solution, how to make sure to not get explioted? Thanks!
Hey, you are correct the concept of MDF is not GTO, but its still a good guideline for building your understanding about varying defence frequencies against different betsizes. the reason MDF doesnt work in practice is because the EV of certain parts of a players range can become negative if the opponents range has a nutted advantage ie more likely to have higher proportion of nutted combos by the river. if the opp leverages this correctly it causes the range with less nutted potential to fold more than MDF vs significant agression.
Hey Iain!
09:05 AKo: Isn’t that a very suspicious turn bet? I mean why would he bet if he had nothing? What worse hands do we expect him to have there? (I’m taking into account that he is very tight preflop).
Thx.
I think its quite reasonable bluffing spot, we definetely check OTF quite some hands that are folding turn, its overcard for flop so he might just think that he's now going to bluff turn on a 'scarry' card with whatever giveups he had. I would think that we win too often against giveups and then improve sometimes enough times to just defend turn.
Hey, the betsize is very small and there are alot of obvious bluffing hands i can be ahead of such at 9ts QTs A5 A4 .
even though he is tight preflop it is SB vs BTN so i expect his range to be wider than 6.5% here
Hello Iain.
3:46 AA
Dont you think that by raising turn you already 'depolarize' his range in a sense that his calling range OTR should be pretty static? My assumption would be that bluffcatchers that are calling turn should be calling on blank rivers against reasonable size (like 3/4) anyway.
4:44 Q8dd
I would consider checking river in this spot. He has to be calling pre and then bet flop (at monoboard+multiway) with TT/JJ/9x really a lot for our valuebet to be good. So i think bet is a bit awkward here.
AA hand - part of the reason for the raise here honestly is exploitative. over years of playing something I have seen very frequently is random players ( i have no stats here) bet the flop and turn with marginal strength hands and draws and then check the river. It really sucks here if he value bets our KQ hands two streets with a weak Ax hand and when we have AQ+ he gets to check back the river. so i am doing this just based on a pure value orientated play at stakes where people are gonna make calling errors.
Q8dd hand - I just reviewd the hand and I agree. we have alot of stronger hands here to value bet and if we check he might bluff JTs or AsX
I liked this video a lot. Even a month ago, these things were over my head - both the concepts, and how to use solvers. I don't have PIO but I do have CREV and GTOPlus. Between study, database analysis, and starting to understand how to use and interpret the solvers, my knowledge of the game is quickly expanding.
That's great, i hope you continue to enjoy the videos!
actually it would be very interesting to finish of this 77 hand analysis and explore how villain should react vs this small bet misstep. What hands to call/raise/fold to learn how we should react vs such lines if villains take it as it happens quite a bit (and its not extremly intuitive what hands to bluff raise for example)
4:18 - with J10s if he calls turn and you miss your combo draw/semi-bluff on the river, how often are you firing the river as a bluff? 50/50, 100%, or player pool dependent?
12:02 - no raise on the flop with 2 pair to protect yourself against a turn 10 or spade?
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.